Author
Topic: Bandcamp (Read 39880 times)

If an artist is going to do a limited release of that kind and not offer downloads to purchase as an alternative, (as far as I'm concerned) they're asking to be ripped off via piracy. I get the appeal of limited releases, but why piss off your listeners by not allowing them to hear your work. To collectors, downloads have no trading value, unlike a physical product, so they shouldn't be considered the same thing.

That certainly is something that the artist should take into account, but I could also see reasons for offering the item exclusively in one format, too. If the artist prefers the vinyl medium, it should really be his call (or the label's) to make. If it is a bonus item sold in a limited run in a physical format, the incentive to buy it would be reduced if it were simultaneously available in a digital format. Should a limited 12K release in deluxe packaging with a bonus CDR, for example (such as Taylor Deupree's latest), be available fully in digital form as well? I view that as his call to make, not mine (as much as that might annoy me).

If an artist is going to do a limited release of that kind and not offer downloads to purchase as an alternative, (as far as I'm concerned) they're asking to be ripped off via piracy. I get the appeal of limited releases, but why piss off your listeners by not allowing them to hear your work. To collectors, downloads have no trading value, unlike a physical product, so they shouldn't be considered the same thing.

Allow me to rephrase a bit

"If Apple is going to release Logic only for Apple Computers and not offering to purchase it for Windows too, they're asking to create angry customers (of course, the piracy issue doesn´t work here...lol). I get the appeal of Mac´s, but why piss off your customers by not allowing them to work with your program on a PC?"

For this example, is Apple now "devil" for you because it isn´t acting the way you would like to have it?

I hear and understand that you would love companies (or labels) just following the rules and wishes of (individual) customers, but if you run a company/label or whatever you have to follow first your personal believes/intentions and not "running behind" each personal wish from outside.

Surely one of the key parts of being an artist is that you are free to express yourself in whatever manner you choose to ? Regarding releasing music in whatever format you like is part and parcel of the same thing thing in my view. Some artists choose to release on cassette which seems somewhat obtuse to me, but each to their own.

There are some artists whose primary concern is the work itself, I saw this a lot when I worked in visual arts organisations.

I don't think Altus or anyone else is suggesting that artists do not have the right to release their works in any way they see fit.

The point is that are real costs that result from limiting people's access to your work via limited editions or by choosing to not make your work available digitally via legal channels.

One such cost is that the fans who want to support the work are denied the opportunity to do so. In another thread in this forum, Mike Griffin mentioned that there were a number of artists and labels who have wondered why they should continue to do what they are doing given some of the low returns on their efforts. And my sense was that everyone here appreciated the fact that one benefit of buying music--beyond the obvious--is that doing so creates a sense of community. Buying music not only enables me to enjoy music that I like, but it helps me feel that I'm supporting an artistic community. It is a niche community, for sure, but an important one in my view.

When fans are denied the opportunity to support the artists they appreciate, it undermines that sense of community.

To be clear, it is not the artist's responsibility to regulate my feelings, cater to my listening needs, or expend energy ensuring that they release their work in the exact format I desire. But if artists deliberately choose to limit the number of people who can support their work, they should be aware that such choices have the potential to alienate and limit their fan base. If the fan base is expendable or irrelevant for the solipsistic artist, then no big deal. But I'm not aware of anyone in this community who laments the fact that they have too many listeners.

Some artists choose to release on cassette which seems somewhat obtuse to me, but each to their own.

I have a slightly different take on this, Pete. Since I prefer a physical format to a virtual one, I am less inclined to buy a digital only release. I just find that I don't play digital only releases very much, even when I've burned them to CDR.

The point is that are real costs that result from limiting people's access to your work via limited editions or by choosing to not make your work available digitally via legal channels.

I think there's a big difference between the two options. With the declining proportion of listeners buying CDs, it makes more sense these days for a small labels to consider smaller runs for physical CDs (to the extent they plan to continue releasing on CD at all) than they had done in the past. My upcoming reissue of "The Wolf At The Ruins/Migration" has a limited CD run of 300 copies (the digital release is not limited). This is not intended to make the release more difficult to obtain, but is more of an attempt to gauge realistic demand, so that the label doesn't end up having to warehouse the remaining CDs indefinitely.

If I could press 100 compact discs or maybe less I would.....no cd manufacturer that I know of will press less than 300. Thats cd's in digipak, artwork and all. Cdr's are a different story but it is not a format Im fond of. So what does one do....satisfy my ego and press 300 cd's and sit on 2/3rd's or.....well there isn't an or there is however Bandcamp.

I still love physical Cd's and will buy them. Forrest's new release which Im really excited about should see all of those 300 discs sell for obvious reasons.

What if a person is environmentally conscious an would like to have the choice not to add an addition carbon foot print. It is on my mind when Im shopping for music. Sometimes no download results in no sale. Thats a loose loose situation. Some labels will offer downloads but only mp3's, why not flac....if I want good audio I have to buy the cd.

I wish every artist could reach their audience in all musical formats that are desired, however the economics at work in this community are prohibitive.

Logged

"Life is one big road, with lots of signs, so when you ride to the Roots, do not complicate your mind, ... " Bob Marley

Thanks Taalem...... The Mobineko site is impressive. Simple ftp uploading of files with good templates for photoshop and illustrator. Quality is hard to determine yet they list the card stock used so thats good. Have you used them?

Logged

"Life is one big road, with lots of signs, so when you ride to the Roots, do not complicate your mind, ... " Bob Marley

One thing I do appreciate about Steve Roach is that he keeps his CD's in print (for the most part). But he also offers them digitally, so no matter what you prefer, you can get his music in your desired format. However, I do realize that for most of us, who sell 50-300 CD's per release, it isn't really feasible. I've been thinking about it lately and I'll continue to have a physical CD provided for each release I do, but probably only a single print run, once it sells out I'll likely leave it as a digital release only, unless I hit the jackpot and hundreds of people clamor for a reprint.

Was over at Juno Downloads.....some high ticket items there. New Boards of Canada, Tomorrows Harvest, $22 + for a wav file album. Warp records is charging $11.95 for the same BOC flac file and 14 and change for a cd. I just feel my wallet is being used and abused. I will pay the going rate for a cd, I know what they cost, but please don't try to push one over on me that a wav file deserves some sort of special price. Its just a wave file, ones & zero's......breath. I feel better now that I got that out.

Logged

"Life is one big road, with lots of signs, so when you ride to the Roots, do not complicate your mind, ... " Bob Marley

I want to thank everyone who participated in the discussion. I think it's your words helped Jesse Solo (NUMINA) finally make the right decision and create his own page on Bandcamp. http://numina.bandcamp.com/

Something I forgot to mention earlier, I was thinking about ways of backing up my albums and I decided that Bandcamp would serve as a some kind of 'cloud' storage facility as well as it's intended use. It looks like it's going to be around for awhile and I can download the Flac files if I ever need to.

I like bandcamp - it's shifted to becoming where I get most of my music from these days. Relaxed Machinery encourages all of our artists to use it in addition to whatever other format they want to release through (CD Baby for digital distro, CDR, etc...). Since rM is decentralized as a label - each artist "self releases... together" - it allows them another outlet to release though that people like - with mp3 or flac - and we have the central label site linking to all the options for our listeners to buy from. Win-Win.

Bandcamp do the all file conversion.....the artist sends them wav files, at say 24bit @ 96k and they will convert it to the other formats. AS to limiting the free format...thats is up to the artist. From my experience usually all digital formats are available, though I have not check the Rich bandcamp site you mention.....so maybe this is new.

Logged

"Life is one big road, with lots of signs, so when you ride to the Roots, do not complicate your mind, ... " Bob Marley

The main reason they cut it down to 128kb/s is to keep bandwidth usage under control. Given it's a free sample, that's reasonable.

I think it's safe to say that if a listener has a critical ear, such as yourself, they know enough that the streaming version doesn't match the sonic fidelity of the purchased product (be it CD or FLAC), and won't judge the recording based on that.